Pinnacle Developments Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1559

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Pinnacle Developments Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1559 Hearing dates: 24 November 2016 Date of orders: 25 November 2016 Decision date: 25 November 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris C Decision: Appeal upheld Catchwords: CONSENT ORDERS: residential flat building, amended plans address contentions in the case, view loss. Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012; 16 State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment; Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Cases Cited: Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827; Tenacity Consulting v Warringah [2004] NSWLEC 140 Texts Cited: Randwick Development Control Plan 2013; Apartment Design Guide Category: Principal judgment Parties: Pinnacle Development Pty Ltd (Applicant)

Randwick City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr I Hemmings (Applicant)

Solicitors: Ms R McCulloch Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Applicant)

Mr A Hudson Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 157617/2016

Judgment 1. Pinnacle Developments Pty Ltd (Pinnacle) lodged Development Application DA/695/2015 with Randwick City Council seeking consent for demolition of existing structures, site consolidation and construction of a new residential flat building in 2 forms over basement parking with associated landscaping and strata subdivision. The council refused consent and Pinnacle is appealing that decision. 2. The appeal was subject to mandatory conciliation before another Commissioner of this Court in accordance with the provisions of s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979. As no agreement was reached during the conciliation phase, the conciliation conference was terminated. As the result of discussion held during that process the applicant prepared amended plans and has been granted leave by the Court to rely on those plans. 3. Those amended plans are said to address the contentions in the case and the parties are seeking Consent Orders from the Court.